Capitol Watchhttp://blogs.courant.com/capitol_watch/
Connecticut politicsenCopyright 2011Thu, 30 Jun 2011 23:47:35 -0500http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specificationSeveral hours after labor reform bill clears CT Senate, a similar provision fails in the HouseA proposal to change collective bargaining rules as they relate to pension calculations and longevity payments passed the Senate with bipartisan support, but a similar measure fell far short in the House.

House Republican lawmakers -- knowing that the bill's chances of coming up for a vote in that chamber were slim to none -- offered up an amendment that would have done essentially the same thing. It would have capped longevity payments at current levels and scrapped them altogether for new hires. it would have also eliminated the practice of using overtime pay to calculate pensions.

Supporters of such provisions, including Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, say it would put the state on a sounder fiscal footing in coming years.

"Anyone who believes this is the only downturn were going to have, I think is living in a very naive world,'' said Rep. Bill Aman, R-South Windsor. "While this may not have a direct impact in the next two years, I think it does set a tone and a standard going forward that will allow the governor and the legislature to better control costs.''

Zeke Zalaski, a Democrat from Southington who co-chairs the legislature's labor committee, urged rejection of the amendment, saying members will have ample opportunity to ponder the matter when the bill approved by the Senate reaches the House.

But House Republican Leader Larry Cafero noted that may never happen. "Why would we turn this amendment down and wait for the bill from the Senate to come down when there have been widespread reports that we might not take it up at this time?"" he asked.

Cafero said it would save a lot of time if the House simply approved the amendment.

But the measure failed by a vote of 50 to 84.

]]>http://blogs.courant.com/capitol_watch/2011/06/several-hours-after-labor-refo.html
http://blogs.courant.com/capitol_watch/2011/06/several-hours-after-labor-refo.htmlDannel MalloyLawrence CaferoZeke ZalaskiThu, 30 Jun 2011 23:47:35 -0500House Approves Highly Controversial Paid Sick Leave; Final Vote At 3 a.m. Saturday After 11-Hour Debate; Gov. Malloy Pledges To Sign Bill That He Lobbied Democrats For; Restaurants Say New Law Could Cause Some LayoffsAfter a high-pitched, high-stakes debate, state legislators early Saturday morning approved a controversial bill to make Connecticut the first state in the nation to mandate paid sick leave for service companies with 50 or more workers.

In a vote at about 3 a.m., the House voted 76 to 65 on the overall bill. About a dozen fiscally conservative Democrats, including Linda Schofield of Simsbury, Richard Roy of Milford, and Frank Nicastro of Bristol, broke with their party and voted with the Republicans against the measure that applies only to hourly workers.

After a marathon day that went through the night, the House adjourned shortly after 3 a.m. Saturday. They plan to return to the historic Hall of the House at noon Saturday - less than nine hours away.

For more than 11 hours, legislators in the historic Hall of the House clashed over one of the most heavily lobbied and controversial issues facing the business community in a battle that cuts across political and financial lines.

The controversial proposal had been significantly diluted from earlier versions, but opponents still raised the same objections by roundly denouncing the measure as a job-killer at a time when the unemployment rate is above 9 percent.

Democrats hailed the bill as an historic breakthrough for workers, while Republicans said it would be a deep blow for businesses that are struggling to make profits as the national economy still remains sluggish.

Manufacturing firms and nationally chartered nonprofit organizations like the YMCA would be exempt, and the bill also would not cover day laborers, independent contractors, salaried workers, and temporary workers. Unlike in its previous incarnations, the bill now applies only to service workers who receive an hourly wage - a broad category that would cover an estimated 200,000 to 400,000 waiters, waitresses, cashiers, crossing guards, fast-food cooks, hairstylists, security guards, nursing home aides, car mechanics, and others. Republicans complained that the list of jobs that are covered is vague, but Democrats responded that any disputes over which workers might be covered would be settled by the state labor department.

"It's a historic moment,'' said House Speaker Christopher Donovan, a Meriden Democrat. "A lot of businesses already know it's the right thing to do. It's not a big cost for business. ... I think a lot of people in America are actually shocked to hear that there are people that don't have sick leave, and I also mean no vacation time, no personal days, no leave at all, no option when someone gets sick in their house.''

The bill would head next to Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, who lobbied wavering Democrats in favor of the measure that he has repeatedly pledged to sign. Malloy made the issue an important part of his platform during the gubernatorial primary battle last year against Democrat Ned Lamont, a Greenwich cable television entrepreneur who ran on a pro-business platform.

"Throughout my campaign and now during my time as Governor, I've been clear about my commitment to the concept of paid sick leave, and I'm pleased that a reasonable compromise has passed both the Senate and the House,'' Malloy said in a statement that was released after the vote. "As I've said before, this is good public policy and specifically, good public health. Why would you want to eat food from a sick restaurant cook? Or have your children taken care of by a sick day care worker? The simple answer is - you wouldn't. And now, you won't have to. Without paid sick leave, frontline service workers - people who serve us food, who care for our children, and who work in hospitals, for example - are forced to go to work sick to keep their jobs. That's not a choice I'm comfortable having people make under my tenure, and I'm proud to sign this bill when it comes to my desk."

Since the measure had failed repeatedly for years, legislators and lobbyists said that the biggest single difference this year was the personal lobbying by Malloy. They said that many Democrats were simply unable to look a new governor in the eye and vote against his wishes. Other veteran Democrats were able to buck the trend in their party.

In his wrap-up speech that started at 2:45 a.m. Saturday, House Republican leader Larry Cafero said that the paid sick leave bill is "the absolutely worst thing we could do, the worst signal we could send.''

"What we need in the state of Connecticut is jobs, jobs, jobs,'' Cafero told his colleagues on the House floor. "The state of Connecticut is, in fact, not open for business. ... There is incentives to decrease jobs.''

"We've heard the mantra of shared sacrifice,'' Cafero said. "It's not good to do business in Connecticut any more, they tell us. These businesses like having employees. They don't treat them like garbage. They treat them like family. ... We're down, and you're kicking us again.''

When the session started in early January, the mantra was jobs, jobs, jobs, Cafero said. But, based on the legislature's actions, they are guaranteeing no jobs, he said.

In the final comments for the Democrats, House Majority leader J. Brendan Sharkey said at 2:50 a.m. Saturday that Connecticut was the first state to pass the family and medical leave act - even before the federal government.

"That's what we do. In Connecticut, we do these things,'' said Sharkey, a small business owner who said he had to lay off employees because of the sluggish economy. "We led the way in Connecticut. ... What did not happen is the sky did not fall. ... We are doing what we need to do.''

Sharkey noted that the issue had caused polarization under the Gold Dome.

"Let's stop the hyperbole. Let's stop the exaggeration,'' Sharkey said. "Let's think. Let's develop legislation that makes sense. ... It has been watered down over the years.''

One of the chief lobbyists against the bill, Joseph Brennan of the 10,000-member Connecticut Business and Industry Association came to the Capitol press room at about 3:20 a.m. Saturday to say that the retail merchants, restaurant owners, and other businesses have not been engaged in hyperbole.

"We are just responding to what we're hearing from our members,'' said Brennan, a senior vice president at CBIA. "We're hearing very loud and clear from our members that they are frustrated that the message is not getting through. ... We have to get the message out. We've got to get a different direction in public policy.''

Earlier, Timothy Phelan of the Connecticut Retail Merchants Association said the heavy lobbying by both Malloy and Donovan proved to be insurmountable.

"The governor and the speaker. Those two factors are pretty big ones,'' Phelan said.

Nicole Griffin of the Connecticut Restaurant Association said that it was possible that the Chowder Pot restaurant in Branford could close from the impact of the bill.

"People will lose jobs because of this bill,'' Griffin said. "People will be laid off.''

Democrats and the union-backed Working Families Party hailed the measure as a breakthrough that could be compared to the 40-hour workweek and child labor laws. The workers will now be able to earn a maximum of five paid sick days per year, based on the number of hours that they work.

"We are here today to make history,'' said state Rep. Bruce "Zeke'' Zalaski, a factory worker and former nightclub bouncer from Southington who is the bill's chief proponent. "We are not here to speak about the captive audience meetings, so anybody who wants to leave, they can.''